If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I think they should SCRAP all their plans and software; and instead focus on creating a platform, which connects desires with those able to implement them.

Ah yes, you've read the Google rant

But seriously... That's actually kind of true.

I want more focus on GNU/Hurd (and I'm serious), because that's a very solid OS to stand on for an unlimited amount of years. It's the best, yet unfinnished, *NIX out there.

And then they should realize a couple of things, for example:
-Standard code libraries, filled with awesomeness, with a Java wrapper on top (so that software will run for eternity);
-Versioning, and only major version jumps remain supported;
-Digital office, done serious;
-OpenGL replacement graphics lib (with the lowest level access support, while still abstracting hardware) for games;
-Standard API's for each new sort of input device (camera, controller (hide HID and DirectInput), accelerometer, etc.);
-Some badass internet protocols;
-Big ass developper manual;
-Downloadable PDF user manual.

Then they should keep the religious stuff behind the curtains. Done.

PS: And the UI needs to be revolutionary; touch&mouse-based graphical commandline. No typing. Having a structured canvas for your tasks, done like Microsoft Project diagrams.

Comment

GNU Octave is already awesome. What is missing is not core functionality, but the millions of closed expansions available for Matlab. GNU Octave is very widely used in academia.

It is awesome, although I'm not sure it is so widely used. Which is ridiculous. Here you have a perfectly capable piece of software that can be used all the way from undergraduate courses to research level, which could save thousands of euros to many University departments, and yet most of what I saw is people using/demanding MATLAB. And I say "demanding" because more than once somebody came up asking for MATLAB and wouldn't accept anything else, even though there were absolutely no real reason for it.

Which isn't to say that there aren't cases where Octave doesn't cut it. It's not the tool boxes and fanfare, but the lack of a JIT compiler what sometimes gets in the way. These friend of mine works in a department where the PA has grown tired of paying MATLAB licenses, but can't switch to Octave wholesale because of execution speed. Actually, apparently my friend found ODE/PDE solving algorithms in Octave which are more sofisticated and faster on paper than those available in MATLAB, but they would run much slower in practice.

Having said this, it's been a good while I myself don't do anything in Octave, for Numpy/Scipy do everything I want plus everything I could ever imagine in terms of non-strictly scientific stuff thanks to Python (say wrapping some data analysis stuff on a real little program that talks to other machines, grabs some files here and there or maybe display a little GUI to make it usable by others).

Originally posted by crazycheese

There are a lot of people paying for proprietary (INSTEAD), which could theoretically pay money for free software instead. I think this is the ONLY reason for free software nonpopularity.

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that if anti-piracy measures actually worked, free software would see a huge increase in use. There's no way, like, absolutely no way, your average moron would pay the full cost of a Photoshop license to do some red-eye removal or crop the picture of a cat. The moment people realised they had to scratch their pockets real hard free alternatives would spread like fire.

Comment

I want more focus on GNU/Hurd (and I'm serious), because that's a very solid OS to stand on for an unlimited amount of years. It's the best, yet unfinnished, *NIX out there.

Extremely unlikely, as I recall Stallman himself said he made a huge mistake in going with mach (he hoped it would save development time, lol). It seems very few developers are interested in the hurd, and like with so many other interesting alternatives out there such as Haiku, Reactos, Aros etc there's zero commercial sponsoring interest. Sadly.

Unlike FSF/Stallman I see nothing inherently bad with proprietary code, but even so it's pathetic to equate such ideas with 'religion'. Hell, if you REALLY want to bring in religion then we might aswell start with the obscene GREED resulting in a total lack of business morals we are seeing in companies and their leaders today which in my opinion is a much better candidate: the worship of money no matter what.

Comment

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that if anti-piracy measures actually worked, free software would see a huge increase in use. The moment people realised they had to scratch their pockets real hard free alternatives would spread like fire.

Quoted for agreement. This certainly isn't true for all users, particularly professionals will (begrudgingly perhaps) fork out the cash to have the BEST but obviously 99% of those with Photoshop installed today would sing a different song were they unable to pirate it. Obviously Adobe knows this and would never target private persons using the software non-commercially, since as for extra every person using Photoshop it means a harder time for the competition (both foss and commercial) to get an inch on Adobe's marketshare.

Not to forget though is that Photoshop IS the best in class for what it does (which should be expected given what it costs and by the sheer number of developer expertize it has) so it's not as if it's market dominance is undeserved. But I doubt many home users would consider it worth it's price would they have to actually pay.

Comment

Having said this, it's been a good while I myself don't do anything in Octave, for Numpy/Scipy do everything I want plus everything I could ever imagine in terms of non-strictly scientific stuff thanks to Python (say wrapping some data analysis stuff on a real little program that talks to other machines, grabs some files here and there or maybe display a little GUI to make it usable by others).

Same here, pretty much everyone I know who has used numpy/scipy has left matlab and never looked back.

The FSF is a non-profit org preaching the importance of Free Software and whose primary purpose is to take care of a couple of important licenses and to provide moral support.

It's not a multi-billion dollar multinational which creates products.

The Free Software ecosystem was never about a powerful leader organising a strategy against Microsoft, to win a "desktop war". It has always been about a community who believes in software freedom. If we don't have a community who values Free Software, we will perish. It's as simple as that. It's not a management battle between RMS and Gates.

You are totally right my friend.

It is sad to see that people are forgetting the importance of the Free Software Foundation. Michael, I would accept such post from some sort of commercial blog or a Windows one, but not from you.

After all this reading, I'm staring to think people don't deserve Free Software because they are unable to capture what Free Software really means.

Comment

Replacement Of OpenDWG Libraries: OpenDWG is a collection of CAD files, a specification for CAD format, and proprietary software for manipulating these files. <b>I'm not too sure why this is deemed a high priority project either</b>, but the LibreDWG project (as recommended by the FSF) is still in alpha development with no releases yet. The last commit to the LibreDWG Git repository was in January of 2011.

As a mechanical engineer, there are 2 pieces of software that will just about have to pried out of my cold dead hands...

CAD(take you pick of commercial stuff): DWG is the defacto format for 2D drawings. STEP (open I think) is the default for 3d stuff. Yes i have tried to use openCAD... try to draw a gear, or even a rectangle with rounded corners.

Excel: We need a replacement for excel that supports macros, and loading COM dlls. I'd be happy to be able to easily pack some python code (with modules) into a openoffice file. I don't need VBA compatibility, but to be honest VBA is likely easily converted to python automatically well enough.

Anyways, AutoCAD, Inventor, Solidworks, and ProEngineer are all lightyears ahead of the opensource stuff and I have probably tried all of the open ones. The reason this is on the list is there is a lot of data locked up in DWG format.